Thursday, June 16, 2005 | 9:15 a.m.
As the 2005 Legislature came to a close last week, a bill was passed that would require limited liability companies to disclose more about their members (investors) when they enter into land deals with state or local governments. The legislation came about after the Las Vegas Sun reported in May that government officials had encountered difficulty in investigating questionable land transactions between the Clark County Aviation Department and limited liability companies, because state law protected the secrecy of these companies' members.
Such government deals, involving taxpayer money, should be transparent -- and that means knowing who the investors are. Absent such disclosure, an environment can be created where politically connected companies can engage in sweetheart deals. That is why we supported this reform legislation, which would require that investors who own at least 1 percent of a limited liability company must disclose their share if the company is involved in a land sale, lease or transfer with a government body.
We were disturbed, however, that the legislation was stripped of an Assembly provision that would have required more disclosure of these companies that donate to political campaigns. In a compromise, the Senate was able to get stricken from the bill a requirement that, if a limited liability company donated to a political campaign, each person who owns at least 1 percent of the company would be revealed as a donor.
Without the political-contribution disclosure requirement, we can expect more businesses to take advantage of this loophole in the state's campaign finance laws by setting up limited liability companies. That way they can secretly influence politicians through donations, all the while escaping detection. Nevadans, who deserve to know which special interests and individuals are financially propping up candidates, are the losers here.
archive
